Mass shooting in Uvalde Texas...

[HappyDays]

30 minutes ago, Boyst62 said:

They're incredibly poor arguments and would result in more violence and potentially a civil war.

 

Raising the age limit from 18 to 21 would result in a civil war? Alright.

[LeGOATski]

1 hour ago, Boyst62 said:

All this talk and not one actual good idea on how to fix this yet.  The posturing and bloviating is understandable to vent frustration but there really is not a solution for "gun control." It's just the tired paroted lines by those who only seek gratification and endulgence.

 

It's quite frustrating because the honest problem is difficult to face. The gun is the symptom of the problem, not the cause. 

 

Instead of facing that truth we instead choose to make those who disagree with us, those who do not share our values the face of the problem. We attack each other which perpetuates the value of the gun and those who wish to use it for evil. We let newspapers tell us "facts," comedians who are paid to make us laugh end up making us angry. We have entire advocacy groups pushing money in their pocket as they create a gesture of purpose focused on singular entity without offering real answers, honest solutions, or viable results. Those same groups all encompass what the generally weak minded consider conversation about a topic. Conversation that doesn't have "facts," good nature, honest solutions and viable results. 

 

We then take this as there are only two sides to every argument. A dichotomy of man where I am right and you are wrong. I have my principles and values while you represent error and evil. We fall in to the trap set for us by those who are truly evil to have us not united, but stand divided.

 

This board, this country, this world have shown in the last dozen years a multitude of examples. And this is our nature. We are doomed as a society.

 

How many people here can simply say they don't have a logical, practical solution to the "gun problem?"  I doubt anyone. Not upon the high ivory towers constructed.

Irony ☝🏻️

37 minutes ago, K-9 said:

Yeah, LaPierre left out the part about the bad guys wearing body armor. Only good guys with a gun AND wearing body armor can stop a bad guy with a gun wearing body armor. Assuming, of course, the good guy with a gun actually has the courage to act.

 

Someone told me today that in all the cases where an armed “good guy” intervened in a “bad guy with a gun” situation that only 3% of the time was it successful. I’m gonna research that, but I would not be surprised in the least to find it to be true. 

It kinda makes sense if you assume the bad guy already had a plan and the good guy is just trying to react. The bad guy will likely be more prepared. Only a good guy who consistently prepares for the situation (like a cop, in most cases) would have a better chance.

[boyst]

24 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

Irony ☝🏻️

It kinda makes sense if you assume the bad guy already had a plan and the good guy is just trying to react. The bad guy will likely be more prepared. Only a good guy who consistently prepares for the situation (like a cop, in most cases) would have a better chance.

It's not irony when I post it admitting fault. But great. This type of comment does nothing to solve "gun control" and instead just another attention seeking individual seeking to have the loudest voice for 15 seconds of endorphins and gratitude.

 

I can't offer anything to this argument in this forum which can contribute. Neither can you. Neither can anyone. Instead it becomes a vacuum of isolation and compliance to fortify the individual beliefs employed by everyone. It is unfair to you, to I, to  humanity. 

Edited May 28, 2022 by Boyst62

[LeGOATski]

2 minutes ago, Boyst62 said:

It's not irony when I post it admitting fault. But great. This type of comment does nothing to solve "gun control"

It was just as effective as your post, but more efficient

[TH3]

2 hours ago, Boyst62 said:

All this talk and not one actual good idea on how to fix this yet.  The posturing and bloviating is understandable to vent frustration but there really is not a solution for "gun control." It's just the tired paroted lines by those who only seek gratification and endulgence.

 

It's quite frustrating because the honest problem is difficult to face. The gun is the symptom of the problem, not the cause. 

 

Instead of facing that truth we instead choose to make those who disagree with us, those who do not share our values the face of the problem. We attack each other which perpetuates the value of the gun and those who wish to use it for evil. We let newspapers tell us "facts," comedians who are paid to make us laugh end up making us angry. We have entire advocacy groups pushing money in their pocket as they create a gesture of purpose focused on singular entity without offering real answers, honest solutions, or viable results. Those same groups all encompass what the generally weak minded consider conversation about a topic. Conversation that doesn't have "facts," good nature, honest solutions and viable results. 

 

We then take this as there are only two sides to every argument. A dichotomy of man where I am right and you are wrong. I have my principles and values while you represent error and evil. We fall in to the trap set for us by those who are truly evil to have us not united, but stand divided.

 

This board, this country, this world have shown in the last dozen years a multitude of examples. And this is our nature. We are doomed as a society.

 

How many people here can simply say they don't have a logical, practical solution to the "gun problem?"  I doubt anyone. Not upon the high ivory towers constructed.

Nah..it’s way to easy for people who should not have weapons of war to get them

[frostbitmic]

44 minutes ago, Boyst62 said:

It's not irony when I post it admitting fault. But great. This type of comment does nothing to solve "gun control" and instead just another attention seeking individual seeking to have the loudest voice for 15 seconds of endorphins and gratitude.

 

I can't offer anything to this argument in this forum which can contribute. Neither can you. Neither can anyone. Instead it becomes a vacuum of isolation and compliance to fortify the individual beliefs employed by everyone. It is unfair to you, to I, to  humanity. 

And doing nothing accomplishes absolutely nothing except ensure that these incidents become commonplace as millions more of these AK/AR-15s flood the market getting in the hands of people who shouldn't have anything more dangerous in their possession than a fork.

 

To think that someone who isn't old enough to have a cigarette and a beer can buy a weapon of war is unconscionable.

[boyst]

Just now, frostbitmic said:

And doing nothing accomplishes absolutely nothing except ensure that these incidents become commonplace as millions more of these AK/AR-15s flood the market getting in the hands of people who shouldn't have anything more dangerous in their possession than a fork.

 

To think that someone who isn't old enough to have a cigarette and a beer can buy a weapon of war is unconscionable.

That'd be incredibly easy to make a debate toward in a proper format. I'm lazy. And I'll leave you with this...

 

I don't think you should have to be 21 to drink or smoke. Most of the world agrees with me, not you. 🤘

 

 

[frostbitmic]

3 minutes ago, Boyst62 said:

That'd be incredibly easy to make a debate toward in a proper format. I'm lazy. And I'll leave you with this...

 

I don't think you should have to be 21 to drink or smoke. Most of the world agrees with me, not you. 🤘

 

 

That's Texas law not mine.

[Just Jack]

5 hours ago, nedboy7 said:

just wondering where the bear arms thing ends. Are grenade-launchers ok? 

 

Did a brief check of hunting regulations, and I can't find anything against using them, so they're okay to have. Won't be much left of that deer or bear, or turkey though.

 

3 hours ago, Boyst62 said:

How many people here can simply say they don't have a logical, practical solution to the "gun problem?"  I doubt anyone. Not upon the high ivory towers constructed.

 

I don't.  Because any viable solution needs to be agreeable to everyone.  And we know there's always going to be someone disagreeing with any solution. 

 

3 hours ago, HappyDays said:

Just take one minor solution, raising the age limit from 18 to 21, and the last two mass shootings wouldn't have happened. 

 

Prove it.  Are you sure they would not have just waited till they were 21?  

[LeGOATski]

16 minutes ago, Just Jack said:

I don't.  Because any viable solution needs to be agreeable to everyone.  And we know there's always going to be someone disagreeing with any solution. 

 

 

Prove it.  Are you sure they would not have just waited till they were 21?  

You're not wrong, but I'd definitely take my chances with a 21 year-old making that decision over an 18 year old. It could only help, not hurt.

 

And solutions definitely don't need to be agreeable to everyone, just the majority.

[nedboy7]

1 hour ago, Just Jack said:

 

Did a brief check of hunting regulations, and I can't find anything against using them, so they're okay to have. Won't be much left of that deer or bear, or turkey though.

 

 

I don't.  Because any viable solution needs to be agreeable to everyone.  And we know there's always going to be someone disagreeing with any solution. 

 

 

Prove it.  Are you sure they would not have just waited till they were 21?  

 

Who needs a solution.  Things are perfect with any moron being able to buy any type of weapon for any reason. 

[GoBills808]

5 hours ago, Gugny said:

 

As a veteran, I have always believed this notion of ex-military being better-equipped to handle firearms is absolutely ridiculous.

 

First of all, some of the most ignorant and most stupid people I've ever known were those I served with.

 

Secondly, for those vets with firearms training/experience, there's a decent chance that they could be suffering from PTSD to some extent.

 

Why on earth do people think they're the best ones to provide semi-automatic weapons?  And then have those people, with those weapons, IN OUR SCHOOLS?

 

More guns is the answer to NOTHING.

 

Semi-automatic weapons in ANYONE's hands is a continuous step backwards.

 

 

The only reason I say that is because you guys have actual training. I’m well aware there are nutcases from all walks of life👍

[NoSaint]

6 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

Raising the age limit from 18 to 21 would result in a civil war? Alright.

yea, if we’ve made it through the last couple years - ain’t nobody starting a civil war for 19 year old gun ownership

[Andy1]

The issue of assault weapons is about to change in a bad way. The army is about to replace their standard rifle the M4 (similar to AR15) with the XM5. The new XM5 will use a significantly heavier and more powerful bullet, able to blow through body armor and light armored vehicles, buildings, etc. In other words- even more deadlier than the typical assault weapons now favored by mass killers. The XM5 will be available in the USA for purchase by mass killers in the future. 

[nedboy7]

31 minutes ago, Andy1 said:

The issue of assault weapons is about to change in a bad way. The army is about to replace their standard rifle the M4 (similar to AR15) with the XM5. The new XM5 will use a significantly heavier and more powerful bullet, able to blow through body armor and light armored vehicles, buildings, etc. In other words- even more deadlier than the typical assault weapons now favored by mass killers. The XM5 will be available in the USA for purchase by mass killers in the future. 

Well then certain congressmen will need those to do some good old boar hunting.  Wild swine started wearing body armor years ago. 

[aristocrat]

19 hours ago, Boyst62 said:

Unfortunately I had to edit my response. I was penalized before for protecting the constitution. It's unacceptable to do so apparently.

 

Regardless, my point. Those are not viable options. They're incredibly poor arguments and would result in more violence and potentially a civil war.

so Florida raised the gun age to 21 after parkland, they have red flag laws that have been used 9000 times since they were enacted, no ammo limit and they already have background checks. No civil war. 

[Tiberius]

10 hours ago, Andy1 said:

The issue of assault weapons is about to change in a bad way. The army is about to replace their standard rifle the M4 (similar to AR15) with the XM5. The new XM5 will use a significantly heavier and more powerful bullet, able to blow through body armor and light armored vehicles, buildings, etc. In other words- even more deadlier than the typical assault weapons now favored by mass killers. The XM5 will be available in the USA for purchase by mass killers in the future. 

Yes. Technology just keeps getting better. Guns will just get smaller and more powerful 

[Nextmanup]

1 hour ago, aristocrat said:

so Florida raised the gun age to 21 after parkland, they have red flag laws that have been used 9000 times since they were enacted, no ammo limit and they already have background checks. No civil war. 

It's a miracle, isn't it!  "Civil war"  LMFAO
 

 

[GoBills808]

6 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

I don't support a complete seizure of firearms, just more restrictions for obtaining them. But if a radical gun control law was enacted of course I would expect everyone to follow it. Following laws that you don't agree with, or accepting their consequences if broken, is the point of democracy. We now live in a society where many people think it isn't enough to have an opinion; they also have to threaten violence if their opinion doesn't become law. Everybody has lost their mind.

😂😂I haven’t lost my mind at all. And for the record I own more firearms and shoot them on a weekly basis more than probably anyone in this thread. I think it’s hilarious you discount my perspective so readily.

[boyst]

7 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

I don't support a complete seizure of firearms, just more restrictions for obtaining them. But if a radical gun control law was enacted of course I would expect everyone to follow it. Following laws that you don't agree with, or accepting their consequences if broken, is the point of democracy. We now live in a society where many people think it isn't enough to have an opinion; they also have to threaten violence if their opinion doesn't become law. Everybody has lost their mind.

A radical gun law was enabled, you'd allow it? 

 

Is this true for all laws or just the ones you spirit? Do you champion the cause of every government ruling? Do you respect all laws or just the ones that embody your feelings?

1 minute ago, GoBills808 said:

😂😂I haven’t lost my mind at all. And for the record I own more firearms and shoot them on a weekly basis more than probably anyone in this thread. I think it’s hilarious you discount my perspective so readily.

Never admit to owning guns on the internet.